| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe the bow was over powered and breaking the game? i've seen gms do stuff like that when one player gets an advantage the others cant compete with. oh and my alchemist got ROCKED by a succubus as well they are pretty nasty. At the same time if you lose a will save something really bad usually happens. To me it doesn't sound like your gm is being a dick stuff like that happens quite frequently. i could tell you a horror story involving our gm a narrow hallway and a gelatinous cube with a mimic inside . Your pc lived accept it and buy another bow.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Where is his spare bow?
I know it hurts- I mean REALLY HURTS- to have the GM break your favorite weapon, but there are lots of ways that could have happened. It could have gotten stolen in the night by a Goblin Rogue with +40 stealth. It could have gotten sundered. It could have gotten disarmed. All of these things, the players have access to as well by the way- maybe your local spellcaster could pick up Charm Monster and go around dominating succubi (woo woo).
My point is bad things happen, it isn't the GM's fault that you weren't prepared when he had a monster make what is a very logical move versus a fighter. Succubi have a decent WIS, one should be able to exploit your weaknesses.
without knowing more I would call it a dick move... least he didnt kill you.
this weekend my GM put us in an encounter which involved an undead with the ability to charm and poses animals.
I play a Ranger with a Jaguar animal companion. Although the campaign encounter says that upon death the monster will posses a nearby frog (nothing about possessing and imitation of a PCs mount or companion), and despite my taking my own pet far out side of the 100 foot range of the monster after the pet exhibited symptoms of being charmed, meaning the monster should not have been able to posses my animal companion anyway. The GM stated that the monster possessed my animal companion, stayed with the party long enough to coup de grace me in my sleep and then ran away to be tracked down and killed by the party the next day.
killing my character served no real purpose to the story line and did not fit any reasonable characteristics described by the campaign, it could not even be revenge for having killed his original body because my character did not contribute a single offensive action to the battle (didnt even buff any one) and to top it all off the party is not in any way able to get a resurrection of any kind in the current environment.
ultimately my character was killed because in another campaign a skin walker that had been tracking the other party for weeks had performed a similar action and my GM just thought that a character getting coup-de-graced in their sleep by someone/thing they trusted was pretty funny and wanted to see the look on our faces when it happened.
I really like the GM as a person... but I am not sure I will continue playing with him.
Charmed or Dominated? A succubus can do both. If the latter, anything goes. You failed a save. You could've just as easily failed one against shatter. This is why fighters take Iron Will.
But I don't think your GM wanted to derail a game with an argument. He puts a lot of work into the game, and is running it for you. But by all means, fight for a replacement. Some GMs are really shortsighted (mine included, and myself even more so). Others are cruel. Others find it hard to squeeze loot into the game while PCs advance so fast. Or to keep track of a whole party worth of gear.
I consider SEVERAL dragon hordes necessary to keep up with the fast XP track. It's a pain.
Voice your concerns and sit tight, though. Your treasure hordes might be just around the corner.
What is considered a dick move by the GM?Everything.
Also yeah, pretty much this. I'm still embarassed about the stink I kicked up when my character got coup-de-graced. I'm hoping it was a learning experience and I can just roll with it next time. We shall see.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would solidly be a dick move if the fighter's weapon had been destroyed in a way which was not logically consistent. Being charmed by a succubus and then told to throw away the weapon you are holding is a completely logical course of action, and while it is definitely not nice to the fighter, I would not describe it as a dick move.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Charm wouldn't have worked to throw the bow away. Must have been dominated. If lava is around, best to remember your DM probably going to use it in a nasty way and be ready to defend.
What would you do, if you were an intelligent demon(ette) in order to take out the fighter?
She could have just as easily said "Throw in the wizard" or something similar..
Let's face it, it's sucky for your fighter, but he lived to tell the tale... And now has to think outside the box
And to me, outside of the box IS roleplaying :D
The use of rust monsters is often considered a dick move, especially after they spent so much game time getting all those weapons, armours, bands and bracers upgraded in a game almost made into the accounting chronicles.
Oh wells...
*munch munch*
|
Sometimes bad things happen to good characters. This one isn’t that bad. Not a dick move in my opinion.
In a recent game my 9th level paladin got attacked by several giant rust monsters, almost destroying his +1 full plate with +1 armour spikes (well naturally they will all go after the heavily armoured paladin over the lightly or non-armoured rest of the party). If not for some very fortunate rolls, half the rest of the party taking hits or wasting actions trying to keep the paladin’s armour from getting destroyed (including the wizard burning action points to fast-cast mending) it was gone for sure. Not a dick move, but a fun and tense encounter. As soon as I saw the rust monsters I was pretty sure my armour would not survive, I like to think I was pretty philosophical about it.
Another game my 10th level fighter got her +2 cold iron bastard sword sundered – completely destroyed in this case – by a giant, with no chance to repair or replace it before the party journeyed into the abyss. Oh well. Two sessions later she found another +2 sword.
As a GM one time (3.5) I put the group up against a pack of babau demons. I don’t consider it a dick move, even if the fighter and the cleric both lost their primary (magical) weapons to the babau’s slime.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Charm doesn't allow you to have someone throw their stuff away. Suggestion does. Dominate might, but a fighter throwing away his primary weapon DEFINITELY warrants a new save with a +2.
This is not a dick move, it is cheating.
IMO, a dick move is:
- when the GM uses houserules without warning the players first. ("I use weapon and armor degradation rules, so your sword breaks when you strike that iron golem!")
- when the GM cuts down a PC before he even gets to act, typically in a "Oh, if you just rolled a 19 or 20, you might have made the perception check! What's that? You have maxed it? Well I rolled well!" bullsh*t ambush.
- when the GM use metagame knowledge to decide tactics (perfect monster/NPC tactics due to ridiculously illogical hivemind is a common one here, but also having NPCs buffed pre-combat even if there is NO logical reason for them to do so. No, this does not count stuff like the extended 24 hour mage armor that the enemy wizard obviously cast in the morning).
- when the GM complains about PCs being optimizers, when every envounter features optimized NPCs that has potions of false life, PC bane arrows/bolts, and the optimal set of potions or scrolls to give large bonuses, but leave no loot.
- arbitrarily punishing loot dependant characters by not making must-have gear available. ("Why no, there is not a single wand of cure light in the entire country! Nor are there any stat-boosters... EVER! And I houserule that craft feats don't work according to RAW!")
I think it involves any move in which the DM is a dick - and by that I mean that motive and group understanding is important. In my opinion, if he's surprised you were upset then it wasnt a dick move (just an indication the two of you are playing with differing expectations) if he watched eagerly to see how upset you'd be, then it probably was.
The 'remember you just destroyed 18k gold...why should I?' exchange suggests it's people playing with differing assumptions to me. I'd sort that out rather than trying to classify the ruling. If you're both working to a different script then it doesnt matter even if nobody is being a dick - people are going to get annoyed anyhow at some point. Sounds like you think WBL is a guideline worth at least loosely paying attention to - he thinks it's irrelevant. I think either assumption can work, but if you both continue with differing assumptions it's likely to continue to be annoying (or to seem like repeated 'dick moves').
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally despise the terms "dick GM" and "dick move".
Many such situations have nothing to do with any inherent dickness, and are a result of oversight, error, lack of caffeine, poor grasp at math or just random brainfart. Geniuine "in your face" situations are rare, and are usually a small tangent of a larger "don't be a jerk" problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally despise the terms "dick GM" and "dick move".
Many such situations have nothing to do with any inherent dickness, and are a result of oversight, error, lack of caffeine, poor grasp at math or just random brainfart. Geniuine "in your face" situations are rare, and are usually a small tangent of a larger "don't be a jerk" problem.
Yeah, this is my thought too. (More clearly expressed than I managed).
Stealing a players's car, leaving them stranded, and returning it the next day with some love stains on the seats, is apparantly a dick move per NPH, even if you were tripping balls at the time.
So, given that, I'd say dickishness is not just temporarily screwing someone, but screwing and leaving them with consequences, regardless of intentions.
I think the better question is if GM dick moves are good for your game to keep the existance of consequence alive and spotlighted, or to keep the party challenged. Otherwise, can the game exist without any consequential challenges?
If mind control that can make you trash your favorite stuff didn't exist, how long would it take to perceive PCs taking damage at all / ever as unreasonably screwing them over?
Stealing a players's car, leaving them stranded, and returning it the next day with some love stains on the seats, is apparantly a dick move per NPH, even if you were tripping balls at the time.
But a little onion burger can fix it.
Your DM coup de graces characters in their sleep because he finds your expressions funny--dick move.
Your DM breaks established monster rules to force you to attack your animal companion--dick move.
Your DM forces you to destroy your best weapon--dick move if the campaign hasn't explicitly decided to make sunder a part of the campaign.
The first two things, far more than the destruction of an item, signal your DM is an immature dick.
I can't say where the threshold is, but I believe that this may be dancing on the line, if only for the comment the DM made on caring about the value of the item. Regardless of the expectations, that sort of response makes your DM sound antagonistic, and that would put him on the jerk list.
Try talking to him about it calmly and explaining to him that you think his decision was a bit harsh. The succubus could easily have ordered the fighter to give HER his bow. That would have provided an opportunity to retrieve it while taking it out of play for a while and would likely have dove-tailed into the role play quite well. If the succubus could make the fighter give her his most prized possession, then it could be psychologically linked to the thrill of stealing a young groom's virginity the night before his honeymoon, something I'm sure a succubus would consider a sport.
DMing isn't about screwing with players and frustrating them. It's about making the game challenging without taking the fun out of it.
EDIT: Ninja'd. So she did ask for the bow. Throwing it into the lava seems like a strange thing to do at any rate. Did she release the charm on the fighter before doing it, so she could watch his reaction?
Whether or not any "destruction of an item" is a dick move, to me, involves what all has happened thus far in the campaign.
I was in a campaign once where we decided to try and sunder an opponent's weapon because he was kicking our arses. The Dm politely informed us that he hadn't used such tricks against us- but if we proceeded to use them against him then he would add it to his arsenal as well.
We found a different way to handle the beast.
You are 10th level. By now you should have a reasonable idea of what to expect. Does the DM Destroy objects? Target spellbooks? have things disarmed and stolen by dim dooring foes and the like?
If this is part of his regular hat (and there's nothing wrong with that) then the PC in question should have a back up weapon and move on.
If however you are now 10th level nearly 11th and he's -never- -ever- done this kind of thing before then.. to me, it does seem like a dick move. Afterall- the DM not only controls the world but also your expectations of how that world works. The idea of needing back up weapons to protect against theft and/or destruction comes from losing said weapons (spellbooks, pouches, holy symbols..) throughout the course of the character's life.
On the other hand, there could be another issue:
If treasure is that scarce the DM could just be going about getting the bow out of the game in a bad manner. When a DM lets an item in- be it a weapon or anything else- that they feel is over powered or game breaking they should take the PC aside and discuss it with them. Or even with the whole table. "Hey, you know Jim, that +8 holy defending Composite Bow (+15) of Demon Slaying (dc 55) is more powered than I thought it would be, lets look at some ways we can tone it back so you still have a good item but perhaps not That good.."
Just my .02
-S
Sorry, the situation was a bit unclear. The succubus was entangled and couldn't fly. And so she fell into the lava 50 ft. below us... As she paddled around there, she casted "Charm Monster".
If the dm forced a player to throw his main weapon into lava due to the charm monster spell and NOT dominate? It is a complete dick move because throwing your weapon into lava is an obviously harmful order, which charm person explicately prohibits.
Dominate would have been a matter of preference (as discussed above) but doing with charm person is a total richard move.
Sorry, the situation was a bit unclear. The succubus was entangled and couldn't fly. And so she fell into the lava 50 ft. below us... As she paddled around there, she casted "Charm Monster".
I think this may have been a stretch in the use of the Charm Monster spell, because most PC's would not toss their bow to a "friend" who happened to be swimming in lava at the time. So in that respect a "dick move".
But as to the destruction of the bow, that kind of stuff happens. In fact it has to happen. Those kind of setbacks are what make your victories sweeter. However if the GM makes the fighter wait a long time for a replacement bow, that is probably another "dick move".
This is not a "dick" move. The GM is playing your enemies... and an enemy has the option to disarm or sunder any weapon that you are killing it with.
I also have to take the grey area camp, mostly it depends on when/if the DM is planning on a replacement weapon, and that would take firsthand experience with the DM. When a player inquires with me about when a specific upgrade etc... is coming, I flat out won't answer that question. My players know that one way or another, whatever build they are or throw at me will have all of the following happen.
1. A chance to shine
2. A time when their greatest flaw or weakness hits them painfully hard
3. Times when they will find gear clearly with their characters style in mind that they wouldn't have thought of.
But, if someone in my game asks me when these things will happen, I will get irate. Something like the bow event, is something I would script, most likely to set up their exploit in flaw or weakness, in addition that usually means I'm also planning on 3. occurring 1-2 battles later. Would I give a player an assurance or an ounce of a hint that the loss is short term... Hell no.
On the other hand your DM might be a dick for all I know. If he regularly tends to destroy equipment, surprise with instant kills etc... Then this is probably another move of his.
Bottom line, if he's a dick it's a dick move, if he's fair it's a setup for something else. Ignoring the grey area on the rules of if charm can actually do this.
Where's the trust? Where's the GM love?
Funny how rules-lawyering always seems to be applied to the PC's benefit.
Not letting your rogues use SA on every hit that qualifies?
But, the succubus thing isn't. Not if it was a dominate. That's RAW.
Am I a bad person?
Unfortunately, lava will pretty much instantaneously destroy the weapon. Even accounting for the silly rules about 1/2 elemental damage then apply DR, a bow is made of wood. It burns quickly.
.
MAGIC wood.
MAGIC wood.Unfortunately, lava will pretty much instantaneously destroy the weapon. Even accounting for the silly rules about 1/2 elemental damage then apply DR, a bow is made of wood. It burns quickly.
.
Then it burns with all the sparks, pops, and pink and purple fireworks you'd see if you tossed a paralyzed pixie on the fire!
Sundering is part of RAW, so it should be a starting assumption that it will happen.
The endurance feat is part of the game too, but that doesn't mean anyone actually uses it. Just saying.
Sundering is part of RAW, so it should be a starting assumption that it will happen.The endurance feat is part of the game too, but that doesn't mean anyone actually uses it. Just saying.
I dunno about you, but my medium armor character is ambushed in his sleep all the time, and being able to be armored during the ambush is rather nice.
Not letting your rogues use SA on every hit that qualifies?
But, the succubus thing isn't. Not if it was a dominate. That's RAW.
The OP has stated it wasnt dominate it was charm person. That isnt raw, thats what makes it a dick move. Going beyond the bounds of the spell specifically to screw over a player.
I dunno about you, but my medium armor character is ambushed in his sleep all the time, and being able to be armored during the ambush is rather nice.Sundering is part of RAW, so it should be a starting assumption that it will happen.The endurance feat is part of the game too, but that doesn't mean anyone actually uses it. Just saying.
Sleep in safer places. :)
In the most recent session of my Savage Tide, the 19th level fighter was in an arena fight with a pair of death giants and a crawling head, and the rest of the party can't interfere. The fighter thought he was clever and opened by trying to sunder a death giant's weapon. The crawling head retaliated by trying to disarm the fighter, on the very open opposed rolls I rolled a 20 and he rolled a 1. I ruled that the head ate the axe.
It was late and we paused the session there. Can't wait to see how it plays out. Am I a dick?